Interaction between Formal and Informal Insitutions in the Process of Transformation from a Planned to a Market Economy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18778/1508-2008.11.07Abstract
In the light of new institutional economics and the history of transformation, the nature of social change becomes an issue of primary importance. To explain this phenomenon, the new institutional economics has turned to the theory of interaction between formal and informal institutions. In this article the thesis functions as a tool for interpreting political and economic changes in the countries of Central Europe, the Balkan countries, the Former Soviet Union and in China. Analysis of the Democracy Scores published by Freedom House seems to confirm the dominant presupposition saying that democracy, clarity and observance of social cooperation rules, a high level of social trust, and high moral standards of individua ls favour economic growth.
But case of the China transformation shows that i nstitutions that have proved successful in the West does not necessarily provide the best solutions for underdeveloped countries. An optimal transformation policy depends on a given cultural background and political situation. However, despite important differences, some similarities between the transformation processes taking place in different regions and countries are discernible. The common feature of all transformation processes is greed and a lack of responsibility on the part of the ruling elites, which pose the greatest threat to reforms and economic development in the long run.
Downloads
References
Bai Chong-En et al (1999), Limiting Government Predation through Anonymous Banking A Theory with Evidence from China, http://ideas.repec.org/p/wdi/papers/1999-275.html [12.05.2006].
Coase R. H. (1990), The Firm the Market and the Law, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago-London.
Colombatto E. (2002), Is There an Austrian Approach to Transition?, “The Review of Austrian Economics” , no. 1.
Hodgson G. M. (2004), The Evolution of Institutional Economics. Agency, Structure and Darwinism in American Institutionalism, Routledge, London and New York.
Huang Jr-Tsung, Kuo Chun-Chien, Kao An-Pang (2003), The Inequality of Regional Economic Development in China between 1991 and 2001, “Journal of Chinese Economic and Business Studies”, no. 3.
Human Development Report 2004, http://hdr.undp.org/reports/global/2004/.
Human Development Report 2007-2008, http://hdrstats.undp.org/indicators/11.html [13.01.2008].
Kang Xiaoguang (2003), China: Political Development and Political Stability in the Era of Reform. “The Chinese Economy”, 35, 5, p. 6-92.
Nations in Transit 2003. Democratization in East Central Europe and Eurasia, Freedom House, New York – Washington.
Nations in Transit 200, http://www.freedomhouse.org/research/nattransit.htm.
Nations in Transit 2004. Democratization in East Central Europe and Eurasia, http://www.freedomhouse.org/research/nattransit.htm [20.01.2008].
Nations in Transit 2007 http://www.freedomhouse.hu//images/fdh_galleries/NIT2007/rating%20and%20democracy%20score%20summary3.pdf [20.01.2008].
Nations in Transit 2007. Democracy Score. Year to Year Summaries by Region. http://www.freedomhouse.hu//images/fdh_galleries/NIT2007/democracy%20score%20-%20regional3.pdf [20.01.2008].
North D. C. (1990), Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
North D., Wallis J. (1982), American Government Expenditures: A Historical Perspective, “American Economic Review”, no. 2.
North D.C. (1994), Economic Performance Through Time, “The American Economic Review”, no. 3.
Parto S. (2005), Economic Activity and Institutions: Taking Stock, “Journal of Economic Issues” , no. 1
Pejovich S. (1997), Law, Tradition, and the Transition in Eastern Europe, “The Independent Review” no. 2.
Pejovich S. (2003), Understanding the Transaction Costs of Transition: It’s The Culture, Stupid, “Review of Austrian Economics”, December.
Qian Yingyi (2003), How reform Worked in China, [in:] D. Rodrik (ed.), In Search of Prosperity, Princeton University Press, Princeton - Oxford.
Roland G. (2000), Transition and Economics. Politics, Market, and Firms, The MIT Press, Cambridge 2000.
Selinger B. (2002), Toward a More General Theory of Transformation, “Eastern European Economics”, no. 1.
Shujie Yao (1999), Economic Growth, Income Inequality and Poverty in China under Economic Reform, “Journal of Development Studies”, no. 6.
Smith S. (1998), New Institutional Economics in the Post-Socialist Transformation Debate, “Journal of Economics Surveys”, no. 4.
UNSD 2007 - United Nations Statistics Division 2007, National Accounts Main Aggregates Database, http://unstats.un.org/unsd/snaama/Introduction.asp [13.01.2008].
World Bank. Quick References Tables. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DATASTATISTICS/Resources/GNIPC.pdf [13.01.2008]
World Development Indicators database, World Bank 2007, http://www.worldbank.org/data/quickreference/quickref.html [13.01.2008].
Zhang Yaoqi (2000), Costs of Plans vs Costs of Markets: Reforms in China’s State-owned Forest Management, “Development Policy Review”, vol. 18 (3).
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

